MD Straw Poll Results - Ron Paul Wins

MD GOP ^ | 09/05/2007 | MD GOP

[Hurricane Bruiser]

ANNAPOLIS— After eleven days of presidential straw poll ballots cast at the Maryland Republican Party’s State Fair booth, Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas) was announced last night as the winner.

The Maryland Republican Party’s first-ever presidential straw poll at the State Fair resulted in nearly 1,000 Marylanders casting a vote for their favorite Republican candidate for president.

[LenS]

"Most Dem voters would swing to the GOP for a fresh, outsider politician who is anti-tax and for smaller government (much like Reagan)."

LOL. Right. Dem voters want pork. They want something for nothing. If they were anti-tax and for smaller govt., they wouldn't be Democrats. In 1980, Jimmy Carter still got 40%. That means he still got most Dem voters.

[BillyBoy]

>> You may say you read it here first - you may not even remember - LOL! - I think Fred Thompson is going to sink like John McCain. I have no quarrel with his stated positions or with his supporters. I just think that he will not appeal quite as well when he gets in unscripted situations. What I have heard from him so far when it has been ad lib, has not been inspiring. Perhaps I am prejudiced by remembering so vividly how he was crippled and rendered speechless by John Glenn, who was the minority chief on the comittee Fred chaired, when they were investigating Clinton shenanigans. <<

I agree Fred probably won't win the nomination (I think he waited too long to announce, given that the primaries have all been front-loaded this year and most of the major states will have voted by February 5th), but I think it's too early to determine whether Fred will sink or whether he will become THE major opposition during the primaries.

I read a piece last week who compared Fred Thompson 2008 to Wesley Clark 2004, and I can see the similarities. Both were "drafted" by grass-root activists who wanted a candidate who loyally supported their issues but had a colorful enough background to "win" over independents. Both announced at the 11th hour. Both had a bunch of "road to Des Moines" conversions on the issues so they'd be acceptable to the party base. Both were "celebrity" candidates who picked up endorsements from the stars. Both were had a self-assured plain spoken, direct manner of appealing to voters. Wesley Clark had nothing but hugely positive press and anticipation while he was "exploring" a run, and then dropped like a rock shortly after he became an "official" candidate.

Then again, one of the reasons Clark got wiped out is people did a background check on him and discovered his career showed that he was a unstable loon who happened to sound sane. Fred, on the other hand, is obviously sane, so he might do well here.

We'll see.

[BillyBoy]

A “Draft Clark” campaign began to grow with the launch of DraftWesleyClark.com on April 10, 2003.

DraftWesleyClark signed up tens of thousands of volunteers, made 150 media appearances discussing Clark, and raised $1.5 million in pledges for his campaign.

DraftClark2004.com, another website in support of drafting Clark, was the first organization to register as a political action committee in June 2003 to persuade Clark to run. They had earlier presented him with 1000 emails in May 2003 from throughout the country asking Clark to run. One of DraftClark2004’s founders, Brent Blackaby, said of the draft effort: “Just fifty-two years ago citizens from all over the country were successful in their efforts to draft General Eisenhower. We intend to do the same in 2004 by drafting General Clark. If he runs, he wins.”

[CJ Wolf]

“Because, like, FR supports the Iraq War? For damn good reasons that escape the Paulites?”

Oh, I support the war. I just don’t think we did it right. Well aside from the first 9 months. But I could play armchair general all night. Our troops should be home already. They should have wiped out Iran along the way and found bin laden and hogtied him. We didn’t need to stick around and ‘nation build’, let them nuts in Iraq and Iran fight each other for a while after we lay waste and take away any threat, they seem to do that well. In a game of Risk Iran would have been crushed along time ago.

I suspect I do know the political reasons for not going into Iran, which is why we haven’t yet. It could be that Russia and China are having a hissy fit. They are Allied with Iran and they don’t like the US at all. Which will be the next step, they might think they are finally ready to take us on. China and Russia have been known to violate treaties so if they choose not to intervene like they didn’t in Serbia, then that’s the gamble we take, otherwise we will see something like this lineup.

Australia
Canada
EU
Israel
Japan
USA
UK

v.s.

China
Iran
North Korea
Russia
India?
Some Latin America

I like Paul because as President if necessary, he’d actually ask for a declaration of war in this case. Maybe Hunter or Tancredo would as well but I doubt any of the others would.

[Calvinist_Dark_Lord]

I wonder how many democrats voted in this poll.

So do i. Seems that the liberal RINO former mayor of New York scored way too high for there to be only Republicans voting in that straw poll.

[lawdog]

Paul was paraphrasing the 911 Commission and bin Laden’s fatah re: declaration of war against the United States-issued during Clinton’s presidency... but some here prefer political theater..

[maica]

I had no idea that there was a “draft Clark” movement. Amazing! The dems just love candidates with military backgrounds, even if their military service leaves Much to be desired.

You have a point in making the comparison to Thompson. Many people hypothesize that he will be the answer to all of the other candidates who are imperfect in one way or another.

I love Duncan Hunter’s positions, but he is “just” a congressman. IOW, he has not lit a fire under the big movers and shakers in conservative circles.
I have trust in Romney’s positions and see him as a very capable CEO of the US.

[Designer]

"Actually, a Paul candidacy is Hillary's worst nightmare."

Indeed.

I have posted here many times that Ron Paul is the only Republican that could actually win.

Against any democrat now running.

[Theodore R.]

If Paul became the nominee, the RNC would endorse HRC, and over 1/3 of registered Republicans would vote Democrat. Maybe 1 in 5 liberal Democrats might defect to Paul, but that would not matter. Paul though could destroy what is left of the RNC.

[Terrence DoGood]

That guy is a cook

[Designer]

"Paul though could destroy what is left of the RNC."

I disagree.

The RNC, as stupid as they are, would never endorse Hillary or any democrat.

Yes, many registered Republicans might not vote with the Party next time, but I hardly think 1/3 would ever vote for a democrat.

Ron Paul might actually draw votes from some democrats, and it has happened before in the landslide that elected Ronald Reagan.

The problems with the RNC did not begin with Ron Paul, but rather with the RNC itself. IMO, the Republican Party (RNC) is hell-bent on self-immolation, and heaven help anyone who tries to stop it.

[jmeagan]

******Because, like, FR supports the Iraq War? For damn good reasons that escape the Paulites?*******

So your minds are closed and you are unable to listen to reasoned arguments against your beliefs? Only the future will pass judgment on the wisdom of our actions in Iraq.

Right now I would say that our actions have had bad results. Iraq will become an Islamic (probably radical Islamic) run country and will never accept the occupation by an army composed mainly of infidels. If we leave tomorrow, a year from now or 5 years from now, Iran will increase its power in the region.

[dirtboy]

So your minds are closed and you are unable to listen to reasoned arguments against your beliefs?

I don't hear reasoned arguments from the Paulites regarding the war, quite frankly.

[lormand]

"In what way is Ron Paul a coward?"

The most obvious one, he wants to hide from the Jihad by pretending we are safer via isolation.

It's too late, they have for decades declared war on us, attacked us on our shores, and now we are finally taming that hornets nest known as the "middle east".

It was a long time in coming too.

[kevkrom]

The straw poll was open to all voting age adults regardless of party affiliation

Gee, do you think that maybe liberal 'rats want a nutcase like Paul to be the GOP nominee?

[P-Marlowe]

Separated at Birth.

[kevkrom]

Paul is now at 3 percent in national polls

He's still polling at or below the MOE (usually 3-4%).

[Clint N. Suhks]

Looks like the GOP's first team this year are the Couch Potatoes.

I don't fault the RuPaulettes for their motivation, clearly they believe in their candidate but they believe in their candidate to a fault. When the RuPaulettes are willing to disrupt polls, call talk shows and lie to the call screener about what they want to talk about and then talk about RuPaul, write hate-filled overtly angry foul mouthed and threatening mail that reads like it was written by anti-Semitic skin-heads to those in the media who do not support RuPaul...that's what I take exception to. And that has nothing to do with why I would never vote for that kook RuPaul.

When RuPaulettes are willing to skew polls to read him winning by a margin of 28% when he is polling nationally at 3% perhaps you should take a step back and realize it's not a matter of couch potatoes verses motivated supporters but a tactic that moonbat liberals use called "by any means necessary"...if that doesn't scare you I don't know what will.

[BlackElk]

I would not vote for Ron Paul or for Pee Wee Herman or for Larry Craig not that any one of them has a snowball’s chance in hell of being nominated for POTUS by the GOP.

[George W. Bush]

When RuPaulettes are willing to skew polls to read him winning by a margin of 28% when he is polling nationally at 3% perhaps you should take a step back and realize it's not a matter of couch potatoes verses motivated supporters but a tactic that moonbat liberals use called "by any means necessary"...if that doesn't scare you I don't know what will.

Go and look at the other candidates' Meetups, Facebook, other online sites. Most supporters of other candidates do virtually nothing for their candidate. They don't make brochures, they don't make signs and placards and place them publicly, they don't pay for and create their own highway billboards, they don't do biking or hiking events to help their candidate, they don't have their own candidate internet radio or internet television stations, they don't travel hundreds of miles to meet and support their candidate, well, the list is pretty long.

The RP folk are activists. And we just passed 40,000 in our MeetUp groups alone. I recognize that Romney has tried to do some of this sort of thing but the media is referring to his campaign as a traveling welfare agency, suffering the same hemorrhaging that virtually doomed McStain. Of the remainder, only Fred seems to have the savvy and appeal to create such a grassroots base of real supporters. By that, I mean people who don't consider it their primary act of activism to sit around on their fat butts whining about other candidates and trolling other candidate threads at FreeRepublic.

It's not our fault if your candidates are so lackluster. Stop blaming other people and get out and work for your candidate.